Re: providing sphinx3-* binaries
On 10/04/2017 04:41 AM, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
>
>
> On 03/10/17 22:46, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 09/29/2017 01:08 PM, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel wrote:
>>> Hello guyes.
>>>
>>>> override_dh_sphinxdoc:
>>>> ifeq (,$(findstring nodocs, $(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
>>> ^^^^
>>> nodocs or nodoc
>>>
>>> I alsa do something like this when there is extensions.
>>>
>>> override_dh_sphinxdoc:
>>> ifeq (,$(findstring nodoc, $(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS)))
>>> PYBUILD_SYSTEM=custom \
>>> PYBUILD_BUILD_ARGS="cd docs && PYTHONPATH={build_dir}
>>> http_proxy='127.0.0.1:9' {interpreter} -m sphinx -N -bhtml source
>>> build/html" dh_auto_build # HTML generator
>>> dh_installdocs "docs/build/html" -p python-gpyfft-doc
>>> dh_sphinxdoc -O--buildsystem=pybuild
>>> endif
>>
>> In fact, I was thinking that probably, it'd be nicer to even do:
>>
>> ifeq (,$(findstring nodoc, $(DEB_BUILD_PROFILES)))
>>
>> and have Build-Profiles: <!nodoc> for the python-foo-doc package. This
>> could even become a standard in the DPMT if everyone agrees.
>>
>> Thoughts anyone?
>
> s/DEB_BUILD_PROFILES/DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS
>
> Quoting the relevant part of the documentation for the nodoc build
> profile [1]:
>
> "Builds that set this profile must also add nodoc to DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS"
>
> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/BuildProfileSpec
>
> Cheers,
> Ghis
Yeah, I saw it, though I was wondering if it was a good idea or not to
attempt to change this. I don't really see the point of having to set
both options, when only a single one should be enough. Also, if you only
set DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nodoc, then you end up with an empty -doc package,
which isn't very useful. So, I don't really see the use case of having 2
options here.
Your thoughts?
Cheers,
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Reply to: